So, who else is trying this out? I've never played any of the games in the franchise (I hate EA, won't be buying this game, but it's a free and open beta). I got it installed after I finished playing Forza for the night, and decided to give it a bit of a whirl.
My initial reaction is that I don't get the big deal with the game. People want to say it's SO much better than Call of Duty for whichever reasons, but I'm just not seeing it (again, only 2 matches, so opinion could change with extended play). For starters, the landscape just looks off. It's extremely bright and looks badly washed-out. Visuals aren't something I typically care about, nor do I here, but it's just something I thought about because of how people mention the aesthetics of Battlefield.
I really can't say I got much of a handle on the weapons, so not a strong opinion of them. I just used the standard AK-12 class, or whatever it was. The guns seem less accurate, though not in a way that makes this game better or worse than the competition. Yes, it's harder to hit shots, but you die more quickly, and the health either regenerates much more slowly or not at all (not 100%). Overall, gunfights and general lives don't seem to last any longer or shorter than in Call of Duty.
Something I'm not a big fan of is that you get 3 weapons. In addition to the primary and the pistol, you get a launcher. That just seems like a bit of overkill, though I guess it's fairly in-line with CoD's willingness to give you a pair of guns and a grenade launcher attachment. The lack of Perks is a plus, because they never felt balanced in any CoD installment I played.
The game types are weak, though I again understand it's a beta. However, you're essentially getting the same flavor of one game, CoD's Domination. Halo's King of the Hill. I'm not sure how this "ticket" system works exactly, but I can't expect to figure everything out immediately eh? The matches seemed to be paced about the same as CoD, with both clocking in around 10 minutes, I think.
As for how I did, I went 6-5 in the first match (joined mid-game and our team was getting destroyed), then followed by going 15-6 (team won by a sizable margin). All of that said (and hastily judged, given the lack of time spent playing), I'll definitely keep trying it. However, the initial excitement died out really quickly. I was hoping to meet a new style of play and be challenged, but I honestly think that playing Black Ops II with the Target Assist off might be harder than Battlefield 4. Of course, that might be because in CoD, no one else really turns the Target Assist off, so I play at a distinct disadvantage, while the Battlefield aiming system is more fair and balanced.
Regardless, I'm going to finish by saying good job, EA, for offering the free and open beta to people. It gives those of us who are leery about throwing $60+ into a franchise we don't trust a chance to build some trust and get a feel for what might be a superior product than what's out there now.
My initial reaction is that I don't get the big deal with the game. People want to say it's SO much better than Call of Duty for whichever reasons, but I'm just not seeing it (again, only 2 matches, so opinion could change with extended play). For starters, the landscape just looks off. It's extremely bright and looks badly washed-out. Visuals aren't something I typically care about, nor do I here, but it's just something I thought about because of how people mention the aesthetics of Battlefield.
I really can't say I got much of a handle on the weapons, so not a strong opinion of them. I just used the standard AK-12 class, or whatever it was. The guns seem less accurate, though not in a way that makes this game better or worse than the competition. Yes, it's harder to hit shots, but you die more quickly, and the health either regenerates much more slowly or not at all (not 100%). Overall, gunfights and general lives don't seem to last any longer or shorter than in Call of Duty.
Something I'm not a big fan of is that you get 3 weapons. In addition to the primary and the pistol, you get a launcher. That just seems like a bit of overkill, though I guess it's fairly in-line with CoD's willingness to give you a pair of guns and a grenade launcher attachment. The lack of Perks is a plus, because they never felt balanced in any CoD installment I played.
The game types are weak, though I again understand it's a beta. However, you're essentially getting the same flavor of one game, CoD's Domination. Halo's King of the Hill. I'm not sure how this "ticket" system works exactly, but I can't expect to figure everything out immediately eh? The matches seemed to be paced about the same as CoD, with both clocking in around 10 minutes, I think.
As for how I did, I went 6-5 in the first match (joined mid-game and our team was getting destroyed), then followed by going 15-6 (team won by a sizable margin). All of that said (and hastily judged, given the lack of time spent playing), I'll definitely keep trying it. However, the initial excitement died out really quickly. I was hoping to meet a new style of play and be challenged, but I honestly think that playing Black Ops II with the Target Assist off might be harder than Battlefield 4. Of course, that might be because in CoD, no one else really turns the Target Assist off, so I play at a distinct disadvantage, while the Battlefield aiming system is more fair and balanced.
Regardless, I'm going to finish by saying good job, EA, for offering the free and open beta to people. It gives those of us who are leery about throwing $60+ into a franchise we don't trust a chance to build some trust and get a feel for what might be a superior product than what's out there now.
Facebook
Twitter